We have a few posts of rpietila; posts were extremely bullish and positive in May 2013, it is different now
i hope they're not so bearish and right that i'll have to blow out my brainz, given that i'm balls-deep invested in btc  What is balls deep? what is your buy in costs per BTC on average? |
|
|
|
AT this point, I am NOT planning to implement that level of BTC trading, and I will only be trading with the portions that I rake in about 10% increments of BTC appreciation and only 1% of my total BTC investment by using preset values that I calculate and input into trading at the time that the rakes are triggered. At this point, I view my plan as somewhat in the hypothetical b/c my BTC portfolio has been pretty much in the red since I started with BTC since November 2013 - however, once my BTC portfolio is in the black and my trading rake and trading plan are triggered and I play around with it for a while, I will likely provide more details. |
|
|
|
|
Thanks to OP for outlining the SSS plan and discussing the various advantages of having a rake plan.
I like this b/c I do NOT consider myself to be an all or nothing investor, and I can apply several of the principles to my own BTC investment situation.
I have been inspired to outline my own variation of such a plan, which in essence embodies the concept of small amounts of rake for the purposes of trading that are going to be triggered at increments of 10% rises in BTC prices - and also based on my average price per BTC and then periodic larger amounts of rake triggered (more permanent) at the doubling of my investment - to take off the table up to 10% on the first doubling and likely to take off nearly all of my invested capital by the second doubling of BTC prices (which hopefully, some day will come).
I will probably play around with Excel to provide me with various categories to monitor my investment using variables that I like to monitor, such as my average price per BTC.
Currently, my average price per BTC is $607 (including transaction fees), so it is very likely that various 1% trading rakes will be triggered this year between about $670 and $1,140. And, then a more permanent 10% rake will be triggered around $1,214 - hopefully by possibly 2015, but i am o.k. if it takes a bit longer, if that is what is in the BTC cards (which seems unlikely but possible). I am still considering the possibility of skipping the permanent rake on the first doubling of BTC in order to take my complete investment back upon the second doubling - which would be 25% on the second doubling.
Regarding strategic forms of dollar cost averaging, I am a true believer in that practice of dollar cost averaging for a couple of reasons: 1) when prices of the asset are going down - especially after a recent bullrun (which was the case in NOvember 2013), it would be better to get in slowly and then to increase capital at lower BTC prices rather than going all in at that point in time - which was the case with me in November 2013 (I could have been invested in BTC at $1200 per BTC, and instead, currently, I am invested at $607 per BTC b/c I followed a form of hybrid DCA) 2) a person may NOT have a lump sum to invest when s/he first becomes interested in making the investment, and may be forced to buy into the investment as his/her salary comes in.
On the other hand, if the asset is surely way under priced, as seems to be the current BTC situation (as compared with late November 2013), it may be better to be a little more aggressive on the front-loading of the investment rather than DCA in order NOT to miss the boat when or if the boat leaves the loading station... or the train or rocket or whatever leaves.
|
|
|
|
Shameless cross-post to advertise my recent findings: I found some results from the correlation of (previous_month;next_month) pairs. In other words, how the percentage gain in the previous month correlates with the gain of the coming month. 1. The linear trend was with positive slope, so in general it goes up the more, the more it has already gone up mo/mo.  y = 0,2394x + 0,0672 Rē = 0,05661 2. If it has crashed -22% or more in the previous month, the next month has never been better than +76%. 3. If it has crashed -48% or more, the next month has also always been negative! 4. If it has gone up at least +6% and not more than +255% (LOL) in the previous month, the next month has never been worse than -32%. 5. About zero gain last month can lead to 500% gain next month (or -50% loss). 2014-5-19: Our Last Month has been -0.083 == -17%Currently with prices floating around $500, BTC prices are about 55% down from the ATH of $1150-ish (over 4.5 months ago)... and about zero gain in the last month. So your findings are telling us we will NOT go any lower than $250, but NO higher than $2500 within the next 30 days? or do we measure from $340 to say we will go no higher than $1700 and no lower than $170. Something seems very incomplete with this supposed mathematical look at past performance to describe potential future performance. - like it's missing something. |
|
|
|
solving the double spend problem... which had been vexing to any prior digital currency (and continues to be a problem for fiat-related systems).
Double spending is not at all a problem with fiat. Neither cash nor credit. Counterfeinting and (succesful) attacks on cards, POS'es, ATMs yes, but not double spending. You cannot clone Benjamin. At least not a fictive but definitely produceable quantum Benjamin that cannot be cloned. I am NOT sure about what kind of crazy reality you are living in, if you somehow are of the belief that there is any kind of meaningful control in any direction on the quantity of fiat in circulation - whether that be by prolific government printing, or even various kinds of shenanigans in other respects by banks or private individuals who compromise the quantity of fiat integrity... which even can be problems in the digital transaction spheres (and may NOT be completely disclosed to the public). Bitcoin has run into some troubles when the transactions that have been taking place off of the blockchain, and solutions are being considered and worked on for these kind of matters. Anyhow, my point in making the original statement about solving the double spend problem is mainly to suggest that this bitcoin innovation is very crucial to bitcoin and also to any other currency that may coopt or copy such bitcoin innovation(s) - whether bitcoin survives or NOT, this solving of the double spend problem was an amazing innovation (invention) in and of itself. |
|
|
|
Exactly, unlike fiat currency Bitcoin's lowest possible unit is 0.00000001
It is. But (most of the) common people don't understand that concept. They think that Bitcoin can be only bought in full numbers. They don't believe that it can be bought in fractions. This kind of marketing question cuts both ways. B/c bitcoin could be marketed in microbits or satoshi's or whatever other increment(s) but then people may NOT appreciate that, either and think that it is too cheap (and NOT worth anything). |
|
|
|
EDIT: I do see that Jorge made additional posts (above) to attempt some comparison between bitcoin and various other fiat payment systems. I remain of the conclusion that his comparison are inadequate largely on the basis that the security of bitcoin is continuing to evolve. Surely there are currently some security issues with bitcoin - yet Jorge seems to be overstating them in order to spread FUD about bitcoin. I look forward to continued developments in the bitcoin space to make improvements on security b/c certainly, it remains a concern for everyone if a security issue develops or involves an individual user, then the irreversible nature of a transaction can be very problematic if one's coins get in the wrong hands.
See this: https://freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/randomwalker/bitcoin-hacks-and-thefts-the-underlying-reason/EDIT: this article suggests that Bitcoin security is much harder to do than "real-world" security, because the expected disutility of punishment is way lower. I expect software/communication security to evolve more or less uniformly. [Don't forget the first goxxing of Gox, when they were sending passwords with GET, unhashed. Announcement thread from 2010, second page or so. Unbelievable people still kept money in Gox with that first impression] Thanks for the explanation of your understanding of the article that you cited. As you may recall, there was a lot of FUD involved with GOX and even with the other security issues that were mentioned in the article. In any event, my main point in the section that you quoted from me is that various security issues are continuing to being worked on in the bitcoin space, and surely breaches of security (and even perceptions of breaches in security) can undermine public confidence in bitcoin and undermine bitcoin adoption. As we speak, these matters are continuing to be addressed by a variety of people in the bitcoin space. Personally, I remain of the belief that user-friendly and better security are in bitcoin's near future.. yet we cannot be sure exactly how it is going to evolve.. but it is NOT an insurmountable path and bitcoin has already been made to be more secure than fiat.. and that is one of its main advantages.. and also solving the double spend problem... which had been vexing to any prior digital currency (and continues to be a problem for fiat-related systems). |
|
|
|
Do I need to tell the many ways in which the private keys of a victim can be obtained by a thief? Please enlighten us. OK, where do I start? You know what a 'computer' is? A 'program'? A 'hacker'? A 'trojan'? A 'key logger'? A 'hardware patch'? A 'memory dump'? A 'covert channel'? A 'malicious wallet software'? A 'pseudo-pseudo-random number generator'? A 'social engineer'? A 'disgruntled employee'? A 'naive user'? Credit card payment authentication requires transmission of authorising data. Bitcoins are easier to keep safe right now. But this is programmable money and it's getting safer all the time. You may not have the vision and imagination to consider what some entrepreneurs will: that enterprising innovators will only make bitcoins safer while credit cards, paypal passwords - every alternative is [cough]heartbleed[/cough] just as vulnerable if not more vulnerable than Bitcoin. Every single thing you listed above could be applied to fiat alternatives such as credit cards, online banking services, payment processors etc. You know this. Either you know all this or you wilfully ignore everything you disagree with. I guess you're far too "academic" to let facts get in the way of your agenda.In my opinion you seem to be giving Jorge way too much credit. Jorge knows that there are equal if NOT greater security problems with various fiat systems, and he seems to be purposefully failing to engage in rigorous analysis in order to make an appropriate comparison. EDIT: I do see that Jorge made additional posts (above) to attempt some comparison between bitcoin and various other fiat payment systems. I remain of the conclusion that his comparison are inadequate largely on the basis that the security of bitcoin is continuing to evolve. Surely there are currently some security issues with bitcoin - yet Jorge seems to be overstating them in order to spread FUD about bitcoin. I look forward to continued developments in the bitcoin space to make improvements on security b/c certainly, it remains a concern for everyone if a security issue develops or involves an individual user, then the irreversible nature of a transaction can be very problematic if one's coins get in the wrong hands. |
|
|
|
Largeish hidden buy order on Bitfinex @475 keeping the market up. It just bought 350 btc from me. I wonder how much more its willing to buy from me?
Ouch ON a mission to lose money, if selling 350 BTC at $475? |
|
|
|
The benefit to consumers is that your funds are safe from confiscation by inflation or outright takings.
BTW, DPR got his coins confiscated and people get coins outright taken all the time so maybe re-evaluate your rhetoric. if you leave your keys in the car it is vulnerable to theft. Bitcoin is easier to secure than any other exchange medium in the world. Having read many of your other posts I understand you do not admit when you're wrong so I will leave you whatever last words on this you'd like, however you've now changed the topic, stated your opinion as fact, and not bothered to address any of your earlier mistakes. So it wouldn't really be worth the effort to continue correcting you. Keyser is making my arguments for me. I will add that I don't think bitcoin is as easy to secure as many of you think. Someone with a lot of experience knows how to secure themselves, sure, but the vast majority of people are going to remain vulnerable to losing coins from hardware failure and hacking. I'm sure plenty of people are not going to see the advantage of bitcoin over just using a credit card. The merchant pays all the fees, and since it's the consumer doing the buying, nobody cares about the merchant. That's assuming you pay off the credit card every month, otherwise you are borrowing money and are rightfully charged for that. In my opinion, the real future of bitcoin lies in the ability to send large amounts of value in a short amount of time, not to make small transactions that are immediately converted to dollars to avoid being subject to volatility. Then again, once the bitcoins get there, they will probably be immediately sold for the same reason the merchants are immediately selling them: to avoid volatility. I am NOT much of a technical geek; however, currently, I am of the sense that bitcoin has the potential to be very secure - whether online storage or offline storage, so long as the storage and various abilities to spend, save, transfer, and to keep track of one's personal coins becomes more user friendly. If some apps can be developed to make these matters easier to use without having to keep track of a zillion passwords or a zillion addresses, then easy user interface has the potential to cause bitcoin to be very secure. In current times, bitcoin seems to be technically complicated b/c there are so many different apps and addresses and keys - which is likely going to cause less security.. in my humble bumble opinion. |
|
|
|
I would timidly guess that there will not be much change in the price today (Saturday).
Significant changes could only be caused by news about the money input/output channels to the Chinese exchanges, positive or negative; or from the absence of such news when such news could have appeared, since traders could see that absence as a positive sign.
However, between today and Sunday no news are expected, and probably there will be none. So there should be no reason for sudden changes in the traders' mood.
The transition from Sunday to Monday is more uncertain. It is possible that some traders will decide to change their BTC:CNY positions on Sunday night or Monday morning in antecipation of whatever news they think many come out on Monday.
I though that Saturdays were traditional dump days. ... b/c of the potential of little fiat on the exchanges in order to counter-act those kinds of dumps.. and the fact that there is a quasi-holiday, there may be even a longer weekend with potentially less fiat to counteract any kind of dumping action... Is this NOT a bit of a pattern for Saturdays.. or maybe we are still trying to figure out the post gox and post china pattern... to some extent? |
|
|
|
. Also, have you not noticed Bitcoin's deflation since November?
You mean that the exchange rate has declined. I am sure that you are aware that this was widely anticipated. Ross Ulbricht did not secure his funds adequately to the risks he encountered. I mean the value of Bitcoin went down, just as the dollar does when it inflates. Whether it is anticipated or not has no bearing on your original claim. Same with whether Ross secured his funds properly or not. You know this. You're not stupid. You simply have rhetoric that you don't want to back away from. Some might call that disingenuous, especially since you're smart enough to realize your mistake.  Keyser's on a rampage. We're a long way off from mass consumer adoption. There needs to be some key markets that we need to capture first. It might even be better to make it more exclusive. You know, something like "Bitcoin, for people smarter than you". "Keyser's on a rampage" is that bullish? |
|
|
|
just got back from vacation, a few hours ago, didn't have a chance to watch price for like 7 days, feels weird being on a computer again.
One or two days ago, I speculated your return would be no later than 4/20 - but thinking more like 4/19 (at least before the poll ended). In my humble estimation, I was about 80% correct. Now, if I could get bitcoin prices 80% correct, I would be rich, rich, rich.  |
|
|
|
Odd that we don't see you here all the times you guess wrong... When did I guess wrong? That is my first prediction thread ever as far as I know...It's also the first time I've published my opinion online (GeekCipher). Where have you been, Cipher? Nearly a month missing from your own "analysis" thread. It's odd we don't see you here now that you were so incredibly far off the mark with your random price guesses. I'm sorry, I meant "math." That's what you claimed to use, right, when Arepo inquired about your prediction? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=518871.msg5816338#msg5816338I mean you assured us we'd only drop to $580 in March (maybe 550 at lowest), not $450 as we did. Your price acumen also led us to believe we'd see $694 on 4/16 -- why are we at $480? At nearly $220 off the mark that means you're wrong by roughly 45%! Eekgads, man. I guess it's back to peddling stolen software codes and other fishy Bitcoin enterprises... Here is the post I originally wrote to you but did not submit because I wanted to give you some rope... Enjoy! (imagine this post starts with you asking, "When did I guess wrong?") ----- You haven't given it enough time yet. You understand humans don't know the future, right? Being correct once or twice or even 3 times about a future event doesn't mean you know anything more about the future than my 3-year old niece or my pet dog. It may make you observant. It may make you fortunate. It doesn't make you future gnostic. Fortunately for your efforts humans are superstitious. You made the prediction a day ago. I think most people here are assuming it looked like there would be a drop of up to $20-$100 and then believe it'll rise. You didn't exactly go out on a limb. But of course the first thing you do on the drop, to gain trust, is jump into a thread you do not participate in and declare your genius to the world. Your post history has nearly ZERO price prediction before yesterday. Look, whatever scam you're up to just hasn't played out yet. You're involved in every scammy/scummy Bitcoin enterprise in existence. It is leading to only one end, and that is you running with other people's BTC without them receiving whatever you promised. The community doesn't need any more of YOU. Seriously, you're selling gift cards, used electronics (oh, by the way you declared you're starting a "bitcoin museum" and are looking for stuff "super cheap"), video game codes, ASIC hosting (how generous of you), hashing power payouts, prognostication services (preparing to sell this, or just driving people to your awesome WP site?), buying used Casascius coins "for fun", etc. You are a walking scam waiting to explode. You're in the "gaining trust" phase either for a bigger event or waiting to see which smaller scam offers quickest/biggest returns, have likely scammed others in the past (or perhaps you're a young gamer and burgeoning thief?), and are ready to move into the phase where you either start taking payments for pyramids, fortune telling services or start selling more expensive stuff that never arrives. Or perhaps how long until folks realize their "hosted" machines are supplying the "hashing power" you're selling? You posted in January 2014: "I absolutely LOVE your setup! now to find a datacenter to host some of my miners.." Yet you now offer hosting services yourself? What are you, a Joe Blow reseller who has magically found a way to make ROI on miner hosting? You're probably running a bunch of smaller varying scam setups waiting to see which one begins to pay out the most more quickly. But you should thank me for this post. Something like it gets posted in the lifetime of every scammer. Unfortunately it causes the dumbest humans to defend you because it does actually appear you haven't scammed anyone yet or haven't been caught. Congrats on that. We wouldn't want to jump to any conclusions about you. So for now, everyone can pile on me and tell me what a terrible human I am. I mean, you're just an entrepreneur, trying to make a buck, right? ----- BOOM goes the dynamite! I don't know that guy from Jack, but I love a good verbal beat down and that qualifies. Keyser is Verbal, kint you get it? Many times I see Keyser's posts are short, but NOT this one.... Good post!!! |
|
|
|
Second: I do NOT know what you mean by Exemplary lesson.
Oh! Wel, well, well... It is decided, then. In order to avoid collateral damage to innocent readers, I will deliver the Exemplary Lesson to @JayJuanGee by private message. If he never shows up again in this forum, you will all know why. If he survives (and I sincerely hope that he will), perhaps he will recover enough to tell you all how bad it was. In either case, all the other sinners out there will have a chance to repent. LMAO!!!!!! Ohh I just had a grand realization - that notorious 'Final Lesson' Jorge has been warning us about in ominous terms since months now must be a candid pic of his decrepifying behind scantily clad in a hula skirt while doing a literal round of the 'spinning' he'd always been accused of doing here - a sight sure to indeed leave even most internet-hardened veterans scarred for life Prof., you must show mercy ahahaa [..] I found it to just be a continuation of the same thing that I had been accusing him.. non-responsive to my concerns about his intentionally spreading misinformation here. Probably, we should NOT be calling him professor b/c that gives way too much credence to him and many of his non-sense posts... [..] Nahh, we may yet title him 'Prof.' merely as a tongue-in-cheek address in much the same way one humors a disheveled old homeless street joker in the Brooklyn subway  (Sorry Jorge I don't intend to be so mean - it's just teasing you is so irresistible ;p) I think that some posters already do that... they call him prof. as a form of exaggeration or to suggest that he should know better. To each his own, and I sometimes will use such a title strategically, as well - in order to exaggerate a point. On the other hand, I question whether he really is a professor... but doesnt really matter too much to me, either way. Mostly important to attempt to stick with the substance; however, sometimes personal motivations and personal representation do become a part of attempting to know which posts to trust and which ones NOT to trust. And, sometimes when a panic comes on, a trusted poster could help to put matters into perspective. An untrusted poster could assist to accomplish the same, as long as the reader understands that the particular poster is untrusted. I sincerely doubt Jorge is misrepresenting himself and I know he's not stupid. What he is doing is pontificating and prognosticating out of his field. Economics is the pariah of academia and not completely without reason. Jorge is like the Noam Chomsky of Bitcoin, but that may be giving him too much credit. At least he has a hypothesis and he's testing it. Economics and TA are similar in that people who don't know the discipline dismiss it as not a valid field. We would never do this with physics, chemistry or even social sciences like etymology or history. Jorge is making a common mistake. It's not more complicated or nefarious than that. I think that you are giving him WAY TOO MUCH credit, if you are calling him the Noam Chomsky of Bitcoin - without getting too much into Noam Chomsky. Chomsky has dabbled successfully in a large number of academic and political fields. I would characterize Jorge's involvement in this bitcoin dialogue more like a rock star commenting on politics. Sure the rock star is going to know some things about politics, but his/her opinion is NOT any better than the rest of the people - even though the rockstar gets a lot of credit and exposure b/c of his/her status as a rockstar.... even though s/he may be talking out of his/her ass about an opinion that is NOT much different from Joe Blow, off of the street. So Jorge has been attempting to unfairly bring his rockstar status to this debate to add credibility to his bs... but it gets worse b/c some of the times, unlike a rock star, Jorge seems to be engaging in purposefully misleading approaches... it is NOT innocent opinions but deceptive portrayals... b/c it is pretty clearly that reasonable inferences from the evidence is that he knows better. |
|
|
|
As a "holder" I still totally care about the day to day price! why? So we can decide when to buy more! That's true too! Although I am getting low on fiat. I am now Bitcoin "rich" and fiat "poor." yes... ready for the next bubble, then ... . in order to liquidate some of that BTC.. |
|
|
|
Thanks a lot for the link, Bitchick. Certainly, rpteila has generated a lot of great quality content in this forum... |
|
|
|
I wonder how many people have bought into bitcoin and been killed short term with drops. So they become bitter and start shorting it and then get killed on its way up. Then preach to everyone that the market is manipulated and they predict doom for all on their way out.
duh...ya...thats been everybody on here at one time or another. Its part of the learning curve. Everyone? If you don't trade you can't short and get burned. This is why holding is always a great option!  Hubby and I have just been buying and holding for a little over a year now. I am not talking about holders...I am talking about people that actually care about the day to day price of bitcoinAs a "holder" I still totally care about the day to day price! why? Most holders do so with the goal of increasing their wealth. The current USD/BTC price is the current measure of that wealth. It follows that holders would very much care about USD/BTC price at all times, as they care about the value of their wealth at all times. I should create an Android app/widget that displays wealth based on BTC holdings multiplied by USD/BTC liquidation price. I just thought holders where more set-it-and-forget-it laid back types. In any event what I was originally getting at is that people that buy and sell bitcoin on a regular basis usually get burned at one time or another...part of the learning curve. I consider myself mostly a buyer and a holder - even though I have come to dabble a little bit in the trading with very small quantities of BTC. I mostly lose when I attempt to do this, and I have been attempting to increase my BTC holdings without adding more fiat. I will find it much easier to increase my trading activities, at least on the big upswings and/or the knowable big downswings, once I get in the black. Hopefully, I will be getting back into the black within the next several months, since NOW my current average buy-in cost is about $607 including fees. I am fairly confident to get back into the black soon, and to continue to attempt to increase holdings while attempting to lower or at least minimize my overall average buy-in costs. I have found some of the systems in BTC to make it really easy to buy and sell BTC quickly with fairly low cost (.02% on BTC e), and this trading can be done 24/7, both a blessing and a curse. |
|
|
|
Second: I do NOT know what you mean by Exemplary lesson.
Oh! Wel, well, well... It is decided, then. In order to avoid collateral damage to innocent readers, I will deliver the Exemplary Lesson to @JayJuanGee by private message. If he never shows up again in this forum, you will all know why. If he survives (and I sincerely hope that he will), perhaps he will recover enough to tell you all how bad it was. In either case, all the other sinners out there will have a chance to repent. LMAO!!!!!! Ohh I just had a grand realization - that notorious 'Final Lesson' Jorge has been warning us about in ominous terms since months now must be a candid pic of his decrepifying behind scantily clad in a hula skirt while doing a literal round of the 'spinning' he'd always been accused of doing here - a sight sure to indeed leave even most internet-hardened veterans scarred for life Prof., you must show mercy ahahaa [..] I found it to just be a continuation of the same thing that I had been accusing him.. non-responsive to my concerns about his intentionally spreading misinformation here. Probably, we should NOT be calling him professor b/c that gives way too much credence to him and many of his non-sense posts... [..] Nahh, we may yet title him 'Prof.' merely as a tongue-in-cheek address in much the same way one humors a disheveled old homeless street joker in the Brooklyn subway (Sorry Jorge I don't intend to be so mean - it's just teasing you is so irresistible ;p) I think that some posters already do that... they call him prof. as a form of exaggeration or to suggest that he should know better. To each his own, and I sometimes will use such a title strategically, as well - in order to exaggerate a point. On the other hand, I question whether he really is a professor... but doesnt really matter too much to me, either way. Mostly important to attempt to stick with the substance; however, sometimes personal motivations and personal representation do become a part of attempting to know which posts to trust and which ones NOT to trust. And, sometimes when a panic comes on, a trusted poster could help to put matters into perspective. An untrusted poster could assist to accomplish the same, as long as the reader understands that the particular poster is untrusted. |
|
|
|
My opinion Is Yes, Some Chinese people are cutting their losses and leaving, however I also think there's a degree of the drop Is people knowing that volume will be low because of Easter/bank holidays and taking advantage of this.
Also, like I've mentioned before, these news stories are still doing the rounds, just look at Social media. It'll take a few days for those to be forgotten about. Sentiment in the West seems to be picking up a bit, look at the surveys on here and Reddit, both indicative of a bullish, bit realistic sentiment.
I'm making no predictions, A./ my TA is shit, B./ I've just polished off my second glass of wine, but I do know that this weekend is a write off.
So, more or less, you are predicting one more test of the "bottom" over the weekend, since there is a long weekend.. and holidays and less cash on the exchanges.. In that regard, maybe $420 to $440 over the weekend... ? I am NOT selling,but I will attempt to plan upon when is the next time and price to buy - attempting to predict more or less the bottom? Since I buy on coinbase, I cannot really set up my orders up in advance.. unless I trade on BTC e, which I do NOT feel comfortable selling at these prices. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
